Arkansas, May, 2005, State Case law

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

State Courts - Arkansas - May 18, 2005

Arvis Harper Bail Bonds, Inc. v. State, No. CA 04-755, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 18, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: Where the bondsman did not file a motion to set aside a bond-forfeiture order until over 98 days after the forfeiture, the trial court lacked jurisdiction at the subsequent hearing to act on the motion to set aside the judgment because the 90-day period provided for under Ark. R. Civ. P. 60(a) had elapsed.

Search Cases for Free

Biggers v. State, CACR04-399, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's drug possession convictions and the denial of his motion to suppress were both proper where, once the trooper smelled the marijuana when defendant entered the patrol unit, the search of the vehicle was supported by probable cause.

Search Cases for Free

Bushue v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA 04-1078, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Father failed to preserve the issue of clear and convincing evidence to sustain the termination of his parental rights where the State moved to incorporate all previous testimony and exhibits, the court asked if anyone disagreed, and no objection was made.

Search Cases for Free

Cearlock v. Mendard, CA04-680, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: The circuit court erred by granting summary judgment and enforcing a restrictive covenant on the landowners' property. There were three owners of lots within the declaration who did not sign the covenant as required by Ark. Code Ann. ? 18-12-103 (Repl. 2003).

Search Cases for Free

Goffin v. State, CACR04-1158, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant admitted that he was the owner of the club in which police saw several men standing around a pool table with dice, a dice cup, and piles of money, there was substantial evidence to support his conviction for operating a gambling house in violation of Ark. Code Ann. ? 5-66-103(a) (Repl. 1997).

Search Cases for Free

LeFever v. State, CA CR 04-1028, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 18, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: Sufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction for raping his 13-year-old sister-in-law where the victim was born in 1985 and testified that she first had sex with defendant in 1998 when she began babysitting for her sister and where defendant's videotaped statement to police, which was deemed voluntary, corroborated the victim's testimony.

Search Cases for Free

Moore Inv. Co. v. Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, CA 04-54, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 18, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: In a legal malpractice case arisng from an acquisition agreement, the trial court properly granted summary judgment under Ark. R. Civ. P. 56 for the law firm. No material issue of fact existed, and the three-year statute of limitations set forth in Ark. Code Ann. ? 16-56-105 (Repl. 1996) barred the claims made by the client.

Search Cases for Free

Norton v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA04-733, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: The termination of the mother's parental rights was proper pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. ? 9-27-341 (Supp. 2003) because, although the mother had made "some progress" at times, she was unable to consistently maintain a suitable environment for her children.

Search Cases for Free

Posey v. State, CACR04-610, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 18, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant did not preserve his arguments that the trial court erred in revoking his probation and by admitting identification testimony because he failed to object in the trial court on either basis asserted on appeal, and his hearsay argument did not contain convincing argument or citation to authority to be considered on appeal.

Search Cases for Free

Renfro v. Air Flo Co., No. CA 04-1217, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 18, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: Where a process server testified that he served appellant with the original complaint to collect on a debt, the lack of an affidavit under Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(g) providing proof of service did not affect the validity of service. The defect in the proof of service was cured by the process server's testimony.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal